- Note: This post contains what I think is a handy little table comparing different withdrawal and redployment plans, including this latest one. If you want to go straight to the table and skip the analysis, click here.
In the absence of any strong leadership from leading Congressional Democrats
for the movement to withdraw the US occupation troops from Iraq, it has been
left to some think-tanks and private individuals to formulate their (our)
own plans in this regard. The latst comes from an interesting source:
the fairly influential, middle-of-the-line Democratic “Center for American
Progress“. It is called “Strategic Redeployment“. You
can download a PDF file of the whole, fairly easy-to-read text
here
.
I know one of the two co-authors– Larry Korb, a hard-nosed but
smart and personable defense intellectual who used to work at the Brookings
Institution in DC, when I had a two-year fellowship there way back when.
(By the way, though the sub-title of the plan is “A progressive plan for
Iraq and the struggle against violent extremists”, people should not really
be misled by the use of the word “progressive” there. In my experience,
this term often doesn’t mean the same thing inside US politics– and certainly
not inside Democratic Party politics– as it means elsewhere in the world.
Inside the Dem Party, it often denotes a particular kind of technocratic,
social-engineering approach to problems more than a leftist orientation…
And that is the case here.)
There is quite a lot to applaud in the SR report, though I think it also
has a number of notable shortcomings. Perhaps most significantly, coming
as it does from a think-tank that is heavy with Dem Party politicos, is that it spells out directly the fact that,
Opponents of President Bush
I have been reading your columns with great interest, particularly those dealing with troop withdrawal. I am in absolute agreement with your position, along with what Mr Schwartz and MrAchcar state. Juan Cole seems to default to a vision of America which never existed when the subject of withdrawal comes up. His air war strategy is essentially the nixon/laird vietnamization strategy,in my opinion. The Korb/Katulis position does have many good points, but their smirking insults directed towards those of us who truly oppose the war cause my to lump them in with the Clinton/Biden Republican Lite crowd. I have learned quite a bit from your posts, keep up the goodwork.
WITHDRAW FROM IRAQ IMMENDIATLEY, PER YOUR PLAN.
RESPECT COLE GREATLY, BUT CANNOT AGREE WITH HIM THIS TIME.
ONE MORE VOTE FOR YOUR PLAN
VERITAS MAX
Joe O., you’re quite right to mention the positions of Gilbert Achcar and Michael Schwartz alongside mine. I’m sorry I don’t have them codified here.
Today in Al Jazerah (Arabic version) the Iraqi Interior Minister Bayan Jabor Solag, said according to some document found during the operation in town of Tel-La’afer, that Al Qaeda thinking to move from Iraq to outside !, Solag said.
I wonder is it coincident or some thing related to the movement to withdraw the US occupation troops from Iraq, with Solag announcement? Or is it Al Qaeda really decided to move from Iraq this time? And why? What the development or what’s changed?
Interesting question, Salah. It would seem that only one element needed to form a “perfect storm” of disasters for the U.S. is currently missing – a major disruption of Saudi oil supply. Al Qaeda is always looking to get the biggest “bang for the buck.” There is not much more they can do to make the situation in Iraq dramatically worse for the U.S. and its “allies.” Blowing up resorts in places like Bali barely gets attention these days. Maybe they’ve decided the time is right to go for the jugular.
After my last post, I ran across a link to this article from Lloyd’s List on Today in Iraq. Key quote:
“As US targets in Iraq become less visible and harder to attack, Sunni extremists drawn from other parts of the Middle East to fight on the front line are likely to begin returning home. They will take with them enhanced bomb-making and combat capabilities refined in Iraq. Therefore, terrorism risks are almost certain to increase in several countries, particularly Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Kuwait.”
Better fill up the car today.
John C,
Therefore, terrorism risks are almost certain to increase in several countries, particularly Saudi Arabia
If your reading write then the report in about secret weapons deal between UK and Saudis its looking write even the Saudis they denied the deal but the said they looking to update their defence network and military equipment and looking all the options from the major weapon suppliers!!
The weapons deal equal to $US71 Billion, I don
Maybe the whole “war on terror” is a hoax designed to strip US citizens of their freedoms and justify attempts by the US to rule the world by force. Maybe 9-11 was orchestrated from inside your own government.
AM
Maybe the whole “war on terror” is a hoax designed to strip US citizens of their freedoms and justify attempts by the US to rule the world by force.
I read in NYT yesterday about increasing number of prisoners in US.
The report showing 10% they had sentenced to live imprisonment and one third of US population sentenced of murders charges!!!
I think US had its inside own problems and they trying to hide their heads under the Sand of Arabs Desert.
What we see from the crimes of Iraqi detainees by US military and interrogators with cooperation with Israeli intelligence give indications that you will get more criminals behind the bars simply because these are War Criminals.
andrea , you may interested in this
Noam Chomsky – Controlled Asset Of The New World Order
This was from Josh Narins of SATP.blogspot.com:
1. You are assuming there
is an Iraq to pull out of.
2. You are wrong about 4-5 months, if you thought that was a limit. Once the orders were given, it might take 1 or 2 months. Any General who can’t get his troops out in 1 is fired. Being ex-military myself, I can
see it.
3. I see CAP as not at all Middle of the Line Democrat. Do you use VoteView? I think it should be clear that CAP is not the center of the elected Democrat Party, but the right wing of it. Believe it or not, J Edwards is more like the middle of
the elected Democrats. Voteview is a math site, and so will take a little getting used to, but it is worth the effort.
4. I’m not a regular reader. Don’t know why you’d believe me.
For what it’s worth, Josh Narins is a passionate (to say the least) true believer in the rubbish that Iraq is and has always been a non-viable entity that was “cobbled together” from distinct, separate regions containing distinct, separate groups that have historically hated each other and never wanted to have anything to do with each other . As someone with direct connections with and extensive direct experience of Iraq, I know better, and am equally passionate about what I know for a fact. I have had several discussions with him on this issue at Today in Iraq during which he often showed great indignation on behalf of Iraqis over the “fact” that the western powers forced them all to share nationality with the hated others. He also became quite acrimonious and personal toward me during our discussions. One way or another something about a non-Iraqi who has never set foot in the country being so emotional about this issue does not sit right with me at all.
As for that article he posted the URL to, it looks like nothing mosre or less than Kurdish separatist propaganda. It flies in the face of a number of facts and realities. For example, if sect is so all-important, how does one explain the fact that all of Iraq’s large Arab tribes (and most of the smaller ones) are mixed Sunni and Shi`a? Concommitantly, how does one explain the fact that Iraqis are more likely to marry within their tribes and outside their sect than outside their tribes and inside their sects? How does one explain the high rate of intermarriage in general, which includes Sunni-Shi`a, Arab-Kurd, Arab-Turkmen, Muslim-Christian, and so on?
Whatever Josh Narins is knowledgeable about, it isn’t Iraqi history or societal structure!